Mullin v. Al Otro Lado · ¶171
Today, the Court issues an advisory opinion on the lawfulness of metering—a policy that has not been in place for almost five years and that the Government has no concrete plans to reinstate. In its rush to greenlight this retired practice, the majority elides serious justiciability concerns and decides legal issues entirely in the abstract. With potential mootness problems and without a factual record establishing how metering works in practice, the writ of certiorari in this case should never have been granted. I respectfully dissent from the Court’s unwise decision to plow ahead nevertheless. I also join JUSTICE SOTOMAYOR’s dissenting opinion because, in my view, her understanding of the Government’s asylum-processing obligations under 8 U. S. C. §§1158(a)(1) and 1225(a)(1) is correct.Read in context ›
slip opinion
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.